????很少有軟件像PowerPoint那樣無處不在,，卻又飽受詬病,。微軟（Microsoft）沒有統(tǒng)計過PowerPoint 的單獨使用量，但其發(fā)言人確認Office（也就是包含PowerPoint的辦公軟件包）在全球的用戶多達10億人,。

????不是每個人都樂意看到PowerPoint的繁盛,。記者伊麗莎白?巴米勒在《紐約時報》（theNew York Times）的一篇文章中描述了軍方領導人對PowerPoint滲透阿富汗戰(zhàn)爭的擔憂。海軍陸戰(zhàn)隊的將軍詹姆斯?N. 馬蒂斯說：“PowerPoint使人愚蠢,。”其他人則認為PowerPoint扼殺了討論和質(zhì)疑,。即使呈現(xiàn)的是同樣的內(nèi)容,，它和口頭報告比起來通常也缺乏分析，沒有說服力,。此外,，它還耗費了大量的人力和時間。根據(jù)《紐約時報》的報道,，軍方網(wǎng)站Company Command問中尉山姆?拉克索爾一天最常做的事是什么,，他回答說：“制作PowerPoint幻燈片?！彼f的是大實話,。

????某些連長應對這個抱怨的方法就是試圖限制PowerPoint的使用。他們規(guī)定不得使用演示幻燈片,，或者限制幻燈片的數(shù)量,。

????設計專家、同時也是《微光》（Glimmer）的作者沃倫?伯杰說這是個好點子,，但卻沒有切中要害,。他認為問題不在于PowerPoint本身，甚至不在于花了多少時間準備幻燈片,，而是使用PowerPoint的方式,。做演示時最困難的地方就在于直視觀眾。演示軟件恰恰就可以避免這一點,。

????伯杰在電話采訪中告訴我：“人們利用PowerPoint來避免和觀眾的交流,。不管他們是否意識到這點，這就是他們使用PowerPoint的目的?！?/p>

????按照即將上市的新書《小消息,，大影響》（Small Message, Big Impact）一書的作者和演講家特里?肖丁的說法，人們使用PowerPoint的原因就是“這是最好的,、最被社會接受的輔助工具,。”她指出,，沒人愿意做一場信息量巨大但卻沒有說服力的乏味演示,。但是同伴壓力以及由來已久的對公眾演講的恐懼常常會支配我們的行為。

????這就指向了一個有趣的可能性：我們求助于演示軟件其實是因為我們潛意識里希望把觀眾對我們本身的審查和評判轉(zhuǎn)移到幻燈片身上,。

????“它讓人們不再關注你,，”伯杰說?！八匝菔菊呋旧现恍枰突脽羝蚪坏?，而不用管觀眾。類似的是,，觀眾也只用和幻燈片打交道,，而不用管演示者?！?/p>

????說來也怪,，TED會議的發(fā)起人理查德?索爾? 沃爾曼作為推動PowerPoint演講流行的罪魁禍首卻堅持不用講臺，他的意圖恰恰就是為了加強演講者那種因受到過多關注而不安的感覺,。（他的原話：“我就希望讓演講者覺得自己更加脆弱,。”）

????基于云的演示軟件Prezi是PowerPoint統(tǒng)治地位的最新挑戰(zhàn)者,，公司首席執(zhí)行官彼得?阿瓦伊非常坦率地承認,，演示軟件也無法改進條理紊亂的推理。軟件開發(fā)者的責任是拓展用戶的選項,，而說服力是一個社會問題,。阿瓦伊告訴我：“解決社會問題不是我們的任務?！?/p>

????Few pieces of software are as ubiquitous -- and as maligned -- as PowerPoint. Microsoft (MSFT) doesn't track PowerPoint usage numbers but a spokesperson confirmed that Office -- the software package that contains the program -- is used by one billion people worldwide.

????Not everyone is happy about that. In an article for theNew York Times, reporter Elisabeth Bumiller described military leaders' dismay over how PowerPoint had infiltrated the war effort in Afghanistan. "PowerPoint makes us stupid," said Gen. James N. Mattis of the Marine Corps. Others conveyed their impression that PowerPoint stifled discussion, discouraged questions, and generally conveyed less analysis, less persuasively, than the same content would if delivered orally. It also sucked up man-hours. According to theTimes, when Company Command asked Lt. Sam Nuxoll what he did most of the day, Nuxoll responded, "Making PowerPoint slides." He wasn't kidding.

????Some company leaders are reacting to this grumbling by trying to curtail its use. They're either stipulating no presentation decks -- period -- or limiting the number of slides allowed.

????A fine idea, says Warren Berger, design expert and author of Glimmer, but perhaps beside the point. The problem is not PowerPoint, or even how much time is spent preparing decks, but how it's used, Berger argues. The hardest thing with any presentation is looking your audience squarely in the face -- and that's precisely what presentation software allows people to avoid.

????"People are using PowerPoint as a way to limit their engagement with the audience. Whether they realize it or not, they're using it that way," Berger said when I reached him on the phone.

????According to Terri Sjodin, speaker and author of the forthcoming Small Message, Big Impact, people use PowerPoint because "it's the best, most socially acceptable crutch." No one aspires to deliver a boring presentation that's information-heavy but light on persuasion, she points out. But peer pressure and the age-old fear of public speaking tend to get the better of us.

????This points to an interesting possibility: that we resort to presentation software in the subconscious hope of deflecting the audience's scrutiny and judgment from us to our slides.

????"It takes people's eyes off of you," says Berger. "So you can basically be engaged with your slides instead of engaging with the audience. And similarly the audience can be engaged with the slides instead of you."

????Oddly enough, Richard Saul Wurman, originator of the TED conference -- definitely a culprit in popularizing the PowerPoint-backed speech -- insisted on doing away with speaker podiums precisely in order to intensify the uncomfortable feeling of having too much attention trained on you. (As he put it: "I wanted [the speaker] to feel more vulnerable.")

????For his part, Peter Arvai, CEO of Prezi, a recent challenger to PowerPoint's crown, is remarkably candid about presentation software's inability to fix poorly structured arguments. It was the developer's job to expand a software user's options. But persuasion, he emphasized, is a social problem. And "it's not our role to solve social problems," Arvai told me.